This article or excerpt is included in the GLP’s daily curated selection of ideologically diverse news, opinion and analysis of biotechnology innovation.

In July 2016, President Obama signed the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Law (NBFDL), requiring food manufacturers to disclose the presence of bioengineered foods and ingredients. That law required the U.S. Department of Agriculture to finalize regulations for the law’s implementation by its two-year anniversary….USDA issued the final rule on December 21, 2018. This article identifies some of the important issues raised in the public comments on the proposed rule, and describes USDA’s final decisions on those issues.

…

What Term to Use—Bioengineered, Genetically Engineered, Genetically Modified, and/or GMO?

What term should be used to describe a product or ingredient that was produced from a bioengineered organism? In the NBFDL, Congress used “bioengineered,” but gave the USDA the discretion to allow other “similar” terms. In its proposed rule, the USDA stated that it considered alternative phrases, but tentatively decided only to allow “bioengineered.”

Probably the most controversial issue in the rulemaking process was whether highly refined ingredients should require disclosure. Highly refined ingredients produced from an engineered crop, such as sugar or corn oil, do not contain any bioengineered material (i.e., DNA or protein)….

It is easier than ever for advocacy groups to spread disinformation on pressing science issues, such as the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. No, vaccines are not harmful. Yes, the use of biotechnology, GMOs or gene editing to develop antigens for treatments including vaccines are part of the solution. To inform the public about what’s really going on, we present the facts and challenge those who don't. We can’t do this work without your help. Please support us – a donation of as little as $10 a month helps support our vital myth-busting efforts.